1 / 16

Wakefield effect

Wakefield effect. 20130708 K.Kubo. Transverse, dipole Wakefield. Wakepotential is integral of wakefunction for point charge x charge distribution. Wake for point charge. For very long bunch, compared with size of wake source, Wakepotential is almost resistive.

myra-buchanan
Télécharger la présentation

Wakefield effect

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Wakefield effect 20130708 K.Kubo

  2. Transverse, dipole Wakefield Wakepotentialis integral of wakefunction for point charge x charge distribution Wake for point charge For very long bunch, compared with size of wake source, Wakepotential is almost resistive. For very short bunch, Wakepotential is capacitive z=0 ~ size of structure

  3. Transverse, dipole Wakefield Particle at position z change transverse momentum as Ignoring y difference along bunch (bunch shape distortion) Kick angle

  4. For 7 mm Gaussian bunch Calc. by A. Lyapin

  5. Effect of wake • Average kick • Orbit change kick angle of center of mass • Particles at different z are kicked differently. Induce z-correlated transverse motion. • Beam size increase Spread of kick angle

  6. Resulted particle position distribution at IP (~Projection of wakepotential) Wakepotential

  7. Effect of single wake source • Center of mass position change • Beam size increase Average of wake potential Spread of wake potential

  8. Wake potential Effect of single wake source at the mover, beta=6260 m, offset 1 mm, bunch charge 1 nC.

  9. IP beam size vs. mover position experiment Effect of offset 1 mm, bunch charge 1 nC. IP beam size increase (nm/nC/mm) Experimental data analyzed by Okugi 1 ref.cav. : 157-102=55 2 no mask def bellows: 102-55= 47 Assume 2 masked deforming bellows = 1 masked bellows 1 masked bellows: 14.5/2=7 1 no mask def bellows: 57-7=50 2 no mask deforming bellows ~ 1 no mask bellows

  10. IP beam size vs mover position experiment and calc. Effect of wake source at the mover, offset 1 mm, bunch charge 1 nC. IP beam size increase (nm/mm/nC) More discussion later by Jochem

  11. Effect of many wake sources • Can be estimated by adding effect of each source. • Depend on sinf but almost +1 or -1 for all structures in large beta region • Random misalignment • Effects are random • Proportional to sqrt(beta) • Orbit deviation: • Effect of every source is added with the same phase. • Proportional to beta. • Depend on phase of orbit

  12. beam size increase by random misalignment mean 77 mean 160 Experiment: ~120 nm/ nC(?) No clear improvement after mask bellows . (?)  random misalignment 1.3 mm and 0.6 mm. For bellows, 1 mm does not seem too large. But they were shielded in May-June. mover position was optimized in most cases (fixed offset was compensated?).

  13. Wake of fixed offset can be corrected by on-mover wake source at other place (If shape of wake potential is same). Phase advance p/2 kick Phase advance p/2 Phase advance p/2 Phase advance p/2

  14. Simulation of beam size increase by orbit distortion Orbit of angle-at-IP phase Experiment: ~120 nm/ nC(from IPBSM 30 deg mode measurements For explaining by orbit, need orbit distortion >2-sigma of nominal (no bellows), ~1 sigma (with bellows) (if assuming calculated wakepotentials)

  15. Simulation of beam size increase by orbit distortion Orbit of position-at-IP. Orbit of position-at-IP does not induce significant wakefieldeffect.

  16. Summary of this talk • Experiments of on-mover wake source • Suggested larger wake than calculation • Factor 1.7 for C-band reference cavity • Factor 2 for no mask bellows • Wake of masked bellows was about 1/7 times of no mask bellows • Beam size dependence on intensity ~120 nm/nC • Wake of cavity BPM, bellows or wake of similar shape cannot explain observations • Orbit distortion 1-sigma of y at IP phase may explain, assuming wake of cavity BPM + 2 bellows at every cavity BPMs (Much larger than expected from calculation with most of bellows are masked.) • Other wake sources with much different wakepotential shape???? • More discussions by Jochem.

More Related